Bangladesh

Discrepancy in Dhaka

ON 6th DECEMBER 2012 the presiding judge of Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal, Mohammed Nizamul Huq, passed an order requiring two members of The Economist to appear before the court, demanding that they explain how we have come by e-mails and conversations between himself and Ahmed Ziauddin, a lawyer of Bangladeshi origins based in Belgium. The tribunal was established in 2010 to consider accusations of war crimes committed in 1971, during Bangladesh’s war of independence from Pakistan.

The Economist has heard 17 hours of recorded telephone conversations and seen over 230 e-mails between the two men. This material is confidential and we are bound by law and the British press’s code of conduct not to reveal such information except in matters of the most serious public interest. We did not solicit the material, nor pay for it, nor commit ourselves to publish it.

These e-mails, if genuine, would indeed raise questions about the workings of the court and we are bound to investigate them as fully as we can. It was in the course of those investigations that we contacted the two men.

Our investigations are continuing. Once they are concluded and if we consider the allegations contained in them to have merit, we will publish them. Meanwhile, we are publishing a short account of our dealings with Mr Huq and Mr Ahmed. These, we believe, have a bearing both on the tribunal’s proceedings and on the order of December 6th.

Mr Huq is a Supreme Court judge and “chairman” of a trio of judges on the tribunal. There is no jury and the court can impose the death penalty. The verdict in its first case could come within days. Mr Ahmed is an expatriate Bangladeshi who is an academic specialising in international law who lives in Brussels. The two men have known each other for 25 years, as they were human-rights campaigners and Mr Ahmed’s late brother had been a student friend of the judge. Mr Ahmed is not just an international lawyer, he is also the director of the Bangladesh Centre for Genocide Studies in Belgium, which is dedicated to ending what he has called “the ingrained culture of impunity” surrounding the war crimes in Bangladesh.

The order includes a description of Mr Huq’s relationship with Mr Ahmed. It explains that the tribunal is based on “new law”, so the judges need to “take assistance of researchers from inside and outside the country”. It names Mr Ahmed as just such an expert. “During the proceedings of the trial and orders the Chairman also took assistance from him,” it says.

Speaking to The Economist in Brussels on December 4th, Mr Ahmed had said something similar, “It’s up to judges to decide where they are going to get research support or other support they need. They are quite entitled to do it. The more so when they really don’t have that research backup [in Bangladesh]. [They ask for help] if they feel if there are people more informed about the issue, especially where [international law] is so new in Bangladesh. I’m not really advising him, but if there is a question then I try to respond.”

But the characterisation in the order and from Mr Ahmed contradicts what the judge told us in a taped interview. On December 5th, the evening before the court issued its order, Mr Huq insisted that Mr Ahmed was not helping him. He admitted that they talk, but denied that he had a part in helping prepare documents or doing anything in any official capacity. He said that for anyone to play such a role would be quite wrong.

“As judges, we cannot take help from third person and outsiders,” Mr Huq said. Asked whether they sometimes exchange e-mails about the tribunal, he says “No, no, no, regarding tribunal, no talks regarding the judgment or regarding the proceedings, no.” Later, he said, “A Supreme Court judge, we do not talk even with our wife regarding the tribunal.”

Judges generally have to be careful if they discuss cases with third parties, because to do so could lead to bias or the impression that they have come under the influence of someone who has nothing to do with the proceedings.

In his interview in Brussels on the previous day, Mr Ahmed had likewise told us that he has “no relationship whatsoever” with court. He can send the judge messages if he wants—“generally though I don’t,” he said, “he’s a judge after all.”

Several questions are raised by all this. On what basis did the judge select the experts who would help him? Why was Mr Ahmed’s role not revealed to the court and to the public until the tribunal order on December 6th, after we had contacted him? The order refers to the presiding judge of the tribunal “receiving the support [of Mr Ahmed] on the developments on International Criminal law throughout the world” and taking assistance “during the proceedings of the trial and orders”. Why then did he tell us on December 5th that the two men had had no talks regarding the tribunal or regarding the proceedings? And why did he say that it would not be appropriate for a Supreme Court judge to talk to others about the proceedings?

If hanging Jamaat leaders is your only goal, then why staging this darama of so called "International" court. If you and your co-horts are fair enough send the case to ICC (International Criminal Court) and world will see who commited the crimes.

being a laws student...I feel shame for entire judiciary in bangladesh..cant say enough to thank economist....we all know there was something behind.....so now the truth has come in light..not only that jugdes but also the govt. must resign without delay...

we demand for an independent judicial enquiery for this shameful incident
we also demand for immediate action to declare this court as void ab initio....

i just seen this e-mail regarding the truth comes out by the economist and the world meadia,thank you to economist, my party was awami league from last 30 years, from today me and my friends coligues we have decided(in our private meeting) not to support or joint any meeting with those hasina government who wants to kill the inocent peopple of opposition party,hasina came to power in the name of war crime and she will lost power the same issu syed shamim ahmed

Shame on economist, for violating privacy against a Judge of a war crime tribunal. It's not the first time judge of this tribunal has been targeted using technology. Last year Nov 14th, 2011 three lawyers of 9 Bedford Row Steven Kay QC, Toby Cadman and John Cammegh, who are hired by the defendant sent an email (stating it as confidential) to the judge saying him to step down (mind you a clear violation of law and ethics)in both Bangladeshi and UK Bar , but later they published this email to Bangladeshi media to embarrass the tribunal forcing it to issue a ruling. (ref: Mid section http://www.bdnews24.com/details.php?cid=2&id=211198&hb=top)

Please do us, the citizens of Bangladesh a favor. On public interest please do your own investigative journalism on those alleged war criminals first then come, and try to discredit ICT by breaching privacy and hacking.

Yes you’re right my dear friend in saying that most people want punishment of the war criminals. It’s natural for any decent human beings to want punishment of the people behind any crime never mind war crimes. Where you’re going wrong is when you say war criminal you’re conjuring up a mental picture of few individuals with beard and cap belonging to certain political party. You aren’t entirely to blame for this disease that many people in Bangladesh are suffering from. I feel very sorry for you because you and alike have been injected with this disease by few Bangladeshi politicians, medias and so called intellectuals working with a particular mischievous agenda. It seems to me that 20 years of propaganda by these people have surely infected many, you being an excellent example of it.

I advise you and people alike to do some serious impartial study on the 1971 Indo-Pak war and history of Bangladesh in general and stop blindly believing whatever you hear in the media. You should also be cautious in repeating whatever you hear from people who clearly dislike Jamaat-e-Islam and their leaders and aren’t shy of shamelessly lying to any extent just to create ill feelings toward Jamaat-e-Islami leaders among the general public. The actual reason why they hate this party and its leader is because of their Islamic ideology but they’re afraid to admit it because vast majority of the Bangladeshi people have sensitive feeling toward Islam.

When you say that these people are “well-known and proved criminals”, I’m sure you don’t really fully understand what you’re uttering. You’re just saying this because you heard wicked people like Shahriar Kabir repeatedly saying it. My dear friend being a fellow human being I humbly request you to restrain from falling into the traps of these immoral people.

Repeatedly falsely blaming someone for some crime doesn’t make them proved criminals, having said that, it’s possible to make some people falsely believe that they’re criminals. I see you as a great example of someone being misguided by their propaganda and therefore trying to give you some light so you may hopefully find guidance.

I’d like to end with some questions for thought.

Did you know that Jamaat-e-Islami leaders were never called war criminals before 4-party alliance become victorious in 2001 election?

Did you know Gatak Dalal Nirmul Committee started their activities only Jamaat-e-Islam won 18 seats in the 1991 election?

Did you know Sheikh Mujib government did identify war criminals but there were none from Jamaat-e-Islami?

Did you know Sheikh Mujib government killed 40,000 Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal members because they were a political threat to them at that time? (I believe they would have killed Jamaat-e-Islami members like that if they saw them as a serious political threat at that time)

Don’t you see something fishy going? (More of political threat Jamaat-e-Islami become more the gruesome criminals of 1971 they become)

Did you know lots of literature on the liberation fight that took place in Allama Delwer Hossain Sayeedi’s area pirujpur were written but nowhere is his name mentioned?

Did you know even Shahriar Kabir didn’t mention Sayeed’s name in his books on crimes taken place in 1971? (Now we know why that may be, don’t we? It’s obvious that as he wasn’t one of the frontline Jamaat leaders when Mr Kabir wrote the book, he didn’t feel it necessary to make up lies against him)

What is going on in Bangladesh is a flagrant violation of international and domestic laws in the name of ‘International War-crime Tribunal’ where some members of the government and the prosecution team have announced when the trial is going to finish, how it is going to finish, and which individuals are going to be executed.

if they indeed killed 3 million people, even one person, you didn't need to resort to this kind of sham trial. you would be able to punish them using existing panel code. but all your lies, propaganda and campaign has been exposed by this recorded conversation.
The real fanatics are the BAL ist and people like you who shut down their mind and close their eyes.

Jamaat-e-Islami. This is understandable as this is the party that stood against Bangladesh at birth and played a role against its coming into being. Many now argue that it all happened a long ago and we should forget it but when a war crimes tribunal is on — no matter how it looks — the past is very much about today.It really makes little sense to condemn Jamaat-e-Islami because there is no reason for it to live amongst us. They fought against the independence of Bangladesh and stood in favour of Pakistan. This should be enough to reject them from the political scene forever. However, they are not only active but have become a contestant in the political scene. If common sense, commonly held ideas about political governance and common decency prevailed, we would not have this situation. But Jamaat-e-Islami was able to beat this rap because of our political mess. It was Zia, the military ruler, who took over after a series of coup and decided to allow Jamaat back to power. Nothing was more cynical than this decision but politics in Bangladesh has already built up a long track record of cynicism. The foundation for such a political act was the one-party rule system. It was extremely unpopular and the people who didn’t support this Jamaat-e-Islami entry move may well have thought this was the price they had to pay to get back the flawed, useless, fractured system called multi-party management but not necessarily democracy.
We deserved neither.We support the ban of Jamaat-e-Islami because it has no space in our country. Since we can’t have any claim on the state, let’s look at the civil space and ask if Bangladesh and Jamaat can live together. According to us, this party can never be trusted because of what it did in 1971 so it should leave the political scene. It was banned once, why not again? Let’s ask the lawyers how it can be done and maybe they can come up with something. At least let’s try.

Many argue that this will cause Jamaat-e-Islami to go underground and commit acts of violence. Excuse me, but what have they been doing since the trials begun? We have actually cast our lot when the trial began and we may have to live with that. So let’s do it in a way that makes sense.please Economist don't take side of killer rapist traitor jamate islami war criminals.

So Economist is going to establish a institute for the yellow journalist to teach hacking, ya?
That's really appreciating. Then hackers should be appointed at every newspaper as an editor.
Obviously i wont believe without any interest a newspaper will hack an important personal conversation. That means Economist deal with payment even to hack. So thats not a newspaper at all that can be a hackers place only. Shame! Shame on this type of stupidity by the name of journalism!

Salam,brother you sound like a mushrik what do you know about jamat and Islam and 1971. There is always propaganda about the jamatis,and for the Pakistani you are saying they invaded bangladesh you are wrong they were ruling us since 1947. You think they didn't know who is who, why you put the blame on jamati, the culprit was the pak soldiers. I hope you will learn and remember this .allah hu Akbar ,